Are some English fighters on a state of the art PED regimen?

[Motorcity Cobra]

They don't even have state of the art dentistry. No way they got state of the art PER regime

[Robbie Barrett]

Do you have a source saying that it's not possible or effective? Especially when combined with other stuff?

I myself did come across this with a brief search:

For men:
15mg/day divided into two or three doses for 8-12 weeks. That’s a very low dose mind you. But it can get you good results. If you have run multiple cycles of Dianabol, then you can go up to 25-35mg/day.

https://www.jpnm.org/dianabol-dbol-review/#For_men

15mg a day isn't a microdose. FFS.

[Citizen Koba]

But accidental intake from where, though? That's what I'm trying to understand.

How does one possibly get Dianabol into their system accidentally?

I honestly don't know, and any scenario I construct just ends up sounding contrived and improbable but if my calculations are even close to correct (1/5 a grain of salt scale) potentially you could get there by maybe eating an apple that had been handled by someone who'd earlier handled a Dbol tablet, or spitbacks on a drinks can that had been used to wash a pill down, and if you handled one yourself - maybe to pass it to someone - for sure.

Clearly if you're going down that avenue it points to use of the drug by those in close proximity to Whyte though; team members, sparring partners, whatever, at which point I'd be thinking at the very least the dude most likely knew it was around him even if he wasn't using himself.

EDIT: Apparently it's possible, though rare, to get Dianabol in liquid form - for injection - which opens up a whole raft of other possibilities of course.

[Redd Foxx]

I see some idiot went and made a copy cat thread of this one.
That's the popular thing to do around here. See something that bothers you? Just mirror it. Lol.

[ShoulderRoll]

I honestly don't know, and any scenario I construct just ends up sounding contrived and improbable but if my calculations are even close to correct (1/5 a grain of salt scale) potentially you could get there by maybe eating an apple that had been handled by someone who'd earlier handled a Dbol tablet, or spitbacks on a drinks can that had been used to wash a pill down, and if you handled one yourself - maybe to pass it to someone - for sure.

Clearly if you're going down that avenue it points to use of the drug by those in close proximity to Whyte though; team members, sparring partners, whatever, at which point I'd be thinking at the very least the dude most likely knew it was around him even if he wasn't using himself.

EDIT: Apparently it's possible, though rare, to get Dianabol in liquid form - for injection - which opens up a whole raft of other possibilities of course.

That's exactly what I'm getting at, Koba.

Any situation you can come up with to explain why Dianabol was in Whyte's system sounds contrived or it points to the company he keeps.

The whole thing is very su****ious even in a sport where drug cheats are becoming more and more common.

[Citizen Koba]

That's exactly what I'm getting at, Koba.

Any situation you can come up with to explain why Dianabol was in Whyte's system sounds contrived or it points to the company he keeps.

The whole thing is very su****ious even in a sport where drug cheats are becoming more and more common.

I hear ya, man. That's one of the reasons I've stated a few times on this matter that what it really boils down to is whether (or how much) you trust the UK sports arbitration body NADP, or indeed WADA themselves since the results have apparently been cleared by them too. The issue is though that if the information they've given is accurate the scientific case looks fairly watertight, and the fact that the clearing evidence was provided not by UKAD (who everyone's pointing the finger at) but by the negative results found by VADA means that if we're looking at a conspiracy that shit would have to run deep indeed.

Thing is it just ain't really possible to construct a scenario in which Dillian's urine test would come back negative then positive then negative again within such a short space of time without becoming just as contrived, coming up with some version of events in which Dillian deliberately took an ineffectual - possibly even insignificant - amount on a single occasion of a drug which depends on a much larger regular dose for effect... ie, that he or whoever was advising him is plain ******.

So you got either a broad conspiracy involving not just UKAD and NADP (for whom boxing is only a very small part of their remit) but VADA... and I guess maybe WADA too, a pointless act of unmitigated ******ity from Whyte or an 'isolated contamination event' no matter how improbable it might seem. Take your pick, I guess.

Unless some further evidence emerges though I'm inclined to provisionally accept that UKAD and NADP have just done their job, though I freely admit it's possible my biases are showing. Much as I strive towards objectivity you can't always get away from your own biases and it's possible I'd be more cynical if it was a non-UK organisation that was being accused of wrongdoing here. It would sit a lot easier with me if they released Dillian's actual urinary concentrations though, and the dates of the negative (clear) tests he had subsequent to his positive.

[ShoulderRoll]

I hear ya, man. That's one of the reasons I've stated a few times on this matter that what it really boils down to is whether (or how much) you trust the UK sports arbitration body NADP, or indeed WADA themselves since the results have apparently been cleared by them too. The issue is though that if the information they've given is accurate the scientific case looks fairly watertight, and the fact that the clearing evidence was provided not by UKAD (who everyone's pointing the finger at) but by the negative results found by VADA means that if we're looking at a conspiracy that shit would have to run deep indeed.

Thing is it just ain't really possible to construct a scenario in which Dillian's urine test would come back negative then positive then negative again within such a short space of time without becoming just as contrived, coming up with some version of events in which Dillian deliberately took an ineffectual - possibly even insignificant - amount on a single occasion of a drug which depends on a much larger regular dose for effect... ie, that he or whoever was advising him is plain ******.

So you got either a broad conspiracy involving not just UKAD and NADP (for whom boxing is only a very small part of their remit) but VADA... and I guess maybe WADA too, a pointless act of unmitigated ******ity from Whyte or an 'isolated contamination event' no matter how improbable it might seem. Take your pick, I guess.

Unless some further evidence emerges though I'm inclined to provisionally accept that UKAD and NADP have just done their job, though I freely admit it's possible my biases are showing. Much as I strive towards objectivity you can't always get away from your own biases and it's possible I'd be more cynical if it was a non-UK organisation that was being accused of wrongdoing here. It would sit a lot easier with me if they released Dillian's actual urinary concentrations though, and the dates of the negative (clear) tests he had subsequent to his positive.

Remember how critical you were of Canelo and his clenbuterol finding, though?

In that case there was an actual, believable explanation as to how clen might have found it's way into his blood. Whether people chose to accept it or not is on them.

But in this case there is almost no plausible explanation for how Dianabol ended up in Whyte's bloodstream...unless he was around it in some way.

To me it's much more damning.

[Citizen Koba]

Remember how critical you were of Canelo and his clenbuterol finding, though?

In that case there was an actual, believable explanation as to how clen might have found it's way into his blood. Whether people chose to accept it or not is on them.

But in this case there is almost no plausible explanation for how Dianabol ended up in Whyte's bloodstream...unless he was around it in some way.

To me it's much more damning.

Ha ha... cept I've never once said that the evidence proved that Canelo was cheating, in fact the huge amount I've written on the subject has all been debunking the claims of those that have claimed that the evidence shows he's clearly innocent and (much more occasionally) those that have claimed the evidence proves he was guilty of deliberate use. In fact it does neither, and that's been my stance all along. Nor does it provide even a strong reason to prefer either explanation depite there being a plausible circumstantial explanation for how the Clenbuterol could have got into Canelo's system without his intent.

Now, had Canelo had a negative test 3 days before his failed positive that would have constituted very strong evidence in favour of a contamination argument... not absolute proof, but, as the NADP phrased it for Whyte's case 'consistent with an isolated contamination event, and... not suggestive of doping.'

Had that been the case it would have been possible to demonstrate that the highest possible dose of Clenbnuterol Canelo could have consumed after his negative test to get the 600 - 800pg/ml concentration would have been considerably below that expected in a typical case of the****utic use and I would have given my opinion that most likely he was innocent of wrongdoing.

Thing is here what you're doing is looking at the circumstantial evidence but seemingly ignoring the (hopefully) much more reliable physical evidence which has been almost the entire focus of my investigations into the topic... just to be clear do you understand why the two cases are so different? Do you get the principle that drugs - or often their longer lasting metabolytes - are eliminated from the body at measurable rates and that if you don't have a starting point (ie a dated clear test) you have no idea how much of a drug was initially taken?

In Canelo's case the urine concentrations measured in his failed tests could have come from meat contamination, if he'd eaten a substantial amount of (highly) contaminated meat within maybe 3 or 4 days of his test, but the same results could equally come from him having cycled off a the****utic dose of Clenbuterol maybe 9 - 12 days or so prior (depending on dosage). No matter how much of a drug you take after a certain number of half-lives you'll reach levels which are first low and then negligable as the drug is gradually eliminated from the body. That's why the earlier clean VADA test makes all the difference in the Whyte case... it sets an upper limit, with quite a high degree of accuracy. for the amount of DBol that could have entered his system.

[Toffee]

Minute trace levels and it's the only time they appeared. Consistent with contamination.

Maybe he got his **** ****** by a hooker who had it cut into her coke? Who knows?

But medical expert opinion says he couldn't have been taking anything remotely worthwhile for those levels to appear inbetween other completely clean tests. I'm happy enough with that.

The funny thing is that every top boxer will be taking all sorts of currently legal things that genuinely do enhance their performance and recovery. Yet we're taking about this that doesn't.

[ShoulderRoll]

Minute trace levels and it's the only time they appeared. Consistent with contamination.

Maybe he got his **** ****** by a hooker who had it cut into her coke? Who knows?

But medical expert opinion says he couldn't have been taking anything remotely worthwhile for those levels to appear inbetween other completely clean tests. I'm happy enough with that.

The funny thing is that every top boxer will be taking all sorts of currently legal things that genuinely do enhance their performance and recovery. Yet we're taking about this that doesn't.

Do they cut ******* with Dianabol?